Clint Jones

mightysainters · Mon 19 May 2008 4:52pm

2 BOG's by a mile last 2 weeks... should be a DEFNITE STARTER

plugger66 · Post: # 569680Post **plugger66** » Mon 19 May 2008 4:55pm

mightysainters wrote:2 BOG's by a mile last 2 weeks... should be a DEFNITE STARTER

I am not boing smart but have you seen the last 2 games and if yes who else is up for promotion.

Otiman · Post: # 569684Post **Otiman** » Mon 19 May 2008 4:58pm

plugger66 wrote:
mightysainters wrote:2 BOG's by a mile last 2 weeks... should be a DEFNITE STARTER
I am not boing smart but have you seen the last 2 games and if yes who else is up for promotion.

Jones, Ferguson and Rix have all shown effort and intensity ahead of about 15 blokes that played the past few weeks in the seniors.

Rix is obviously not an AFL level footballer (unless our rucks are all injured), but Jones and Ferguson need to have the chance to prove that they are.

Geary is close and if we drop Gram, he'd be the likely guy to come in for him.

plugger66 · Post: # 569688Post **plugger66** » Mon 19 May 2008 5:00pm

Otiman wrote:
plugger66 wrote:
mightysainters wrote:2 BOG's by a mile last 2 weeks... should be a DEFNITE STARTER
I am not boing smart but have you seen the last 2 games and if yes who else is up for promotion.
Jones, Ferguson and Rix have all shown effort and intensity ahead of about 15 blokes that played the past few weeks in the seniors.

Rix is obviously not an AFL level footballer (unless our rucks are all injured), but Jones and Ferguson need to have the chance to prove that they are.

Geary is close and if we drop Gram, he'd be the likely guy to come in for him.

Well Grammy will not be dropped this week so geary may miss out.

mightysainters · Mon 19 May 2008 5:07pm

plugger66 wrote:
mightysainters wrote:2 BOG's by a mile last 2 weeks... should be a DEFNITE STARTER
I am not boing smart but have you seen the last 2 games and if yes who else is up for promotion.

Watched the game on tv this week but last week i was there...

Well last week was blake played well.... Fiora is a dud....

McEvoy looked alrite last week really good hands and this week played well through the ruck and up forward in trying conditions....But obviously our ruck division is alright... and up fwd he is more than capable...

Silvagni... how isnt he listed? Geez would be a welcome inclusion to cover Maguire...

Steven is the most exciting proposition looks to be a player and Gwilt looked very good last week and okay this week...

Geary also looks quite good coming off the back flank... is a player

OUT: Birss or Fisher and Raph Clarke

In: Geary, Jones

People will say why them bla bla bla its because they're negators and have no other streings in their bow...whilst Raph is a dud...

obviously something must be done about G too...

Otiman · Post: # 569705Post **Otiman** » Mon 19 May 2008 5:23pm

Birss is required, will run with Black. Blake played well so you wouldn't drop him.

Geary didn't look damaging for the scorps (although he was everywhere).

In: Jones
Out: Raph or Schneider

suss · Post: # 569715Post **suss** » Mon 19 May 2008 5:33pm

You make some good points mighysainters.

I only saw the game Saturday but McEvoy and Steven look very promising. If Gardiner or King miss weeks Big Mac should come in. And yes, why Silvagni isn't on a list on astonishing. He looks very capable and composed.

Geary should be considered. Twice in the game he put himself in a dangerous position running back into packs. Although I'd be concerned about whether he wins enough football yet.

I think Ferg needs to come in for Frase. Allen is an option but I think overall we're too tall. Ferg played as a leading forward pocket ala Williams at Hawthorn seems like the go. I reckon he'd provide more defensive pressure than Allen. I'd play Kosi at FF and Charlie G CHF.

And Jones MUST come in. There are plenty of players with superior foot skills but if you can't get or win the pill then the standard of your foot disposal becomes pretty irrelavant. And there's no better tackler in the team (except Ball maybe).

The Ins and outs for me are:

In: Jones, Ferguson
Out: Raph, Frase

Birss and Fisher would be lucky to retain their spots.

LTN16 · Post: # 569717Post **LTN16** » Mon 19 May 2008 5:34pm

CJ is a great player at VFL level but simply can't go that extra step and crack it at AFL level.

Michael Rix is another player in this category.

vacuous space · Mon 19 May 2008 5:36pm

IMO CJ should play in the centre where he can win the ball and fire out a quick handball or a short kick. His chasing and tackling skills are what gets Ross to play him up forward, but IMO you can't play a guy up forward who's kicking is questionable. You can get away with it in the centre.

evertonfc · Post: # 569733Post **evertonfc** » Mon 19 May 2008 5:48pm

mad saint guy wrote:Nope. In order to win games you need to be able to not only get the ball, but kick it to your team mates.

Turnovers are more costly than ever in the modern game, and Jones is by far the worst decision-maker and disposer of the ball at St Kilda (and possibly the AFL).

100% spot on.

CJ isn't up to it - he's a WAFL/VFL star because you don't need to use the ball well in those leagues.

Hells bells, he's like T1000 - just when you thought he was buried once and for all by superior opposition, he just keeps bobbing back up.

Can we just about end this discussion by saying he's not up to it, and the past 18 months has proven that.

suss wrote:I only saw the game Saturday but McEvoy and Steven look very promising. If Gardiner or King miss weeks Big Mac should come in. And yes, why Silvagni isn't on a list on astonishing. He looks very capable and composed.

Geary should be considered. Twice in the game he put himself in a dangerous position running back into packs. Although I'd be concerned about whether he wins enough football yet.

Three players which DEFINITELY need to have their cases pushed. At least two of them will should turn out to be senior players in the long-term, with something to offer from each.

I'm also in the Allen camp. Offers a hell of a lot more than Gehrig.

The_Dud · Post: # 569735Post **The_Dud** » Mon 19 May 2008 5:51pm

i would like to see Ross give CJ the ride he has given Raph, and at least he might show some actual improvement in the seniors

u can't ignore a guy who gets best on in the 2's two weeks in a row

St DAC · Post: # 569738Post **St DAC** » Mon 19 May 2008 5:53pm

suss wrote:Birss and Fisher would be lucky to retain their spots.

Why would Birss be lucky to retain his spot? He was very good against the Pies, held Heath Shaw pretty well and scored himself.

Leigh Fisher OTOH may be on the cards ...

suss · Post: # 569758Post **suss** » Mon 19 May 2008 6:04pm

St DAC wrote:suss wrote:
Birss and Fisher would be lucky to retain their spots.

Why would Birss be lucky to retain his spot? He was very good against the Pies, held Heath Shaw pretty well and scored himself.

He was good and is good generally, but he's mighty slow. He can get away with it against a plodder like Heath Shaw, but against Brisbane you'd want to have the perfect match up.

To the top · Post: # 569770Post **To the top** » Mon 19 May 2008 6:16pm

Actually taped the Casey game so I could watch it at some stage.

Tragic!

But, having now watched it, the players who impressed were Jones, McEvoy, Howard and, in very difficult conditions for forwards, Allen and Stevens.

Jones involved himself consistently, McEvoy showed great class for a big man in those conditions, Howard was very proficient in defence capitalising on the conditions, Allen presented well in such conditions and Stevens did those things which have you speculating that the kid has something special.

They should be the next cabs off the rank.

Otiman · Post: # 569774Post **Otiman** » Mon 19 May 2008 6:20pm

To the top wrote:But, having now watched it, the players who impressed were Jones, McEvoy, Howard and, in very difficult conditions for forwards, Allen and Stevens.

Agree with all of these, except perhaps Allen. I just don't think he tried hard enough. His effort rate was down, I thought.

Like Armo last year, He plays well in bursts and when he gets near it he can cause some havok for the opposition, it's just a matter of getting near it more often. Also doesn't play as a leading forward enough, relies on pack marks too much, and with the state of AFL teams defensive structure these days, that just won't cut it.

evertonfc · Post: # 569776Post **evertonfc** » Mon 19 May 2008 6:25pm

The_Dud wrote:u can't ignore a guy who gets best on in the 2's two weeks in a row

I reckon that Clinton Jones isn't good enough to play in the AFL is a huge issue for him to overcome.

esaint66 · Post: # 569800Post **esaint66** » Mon 19 May 2008 6:37pm

Buckets wrote:If anything he comes in for Schneider and is told not to leave the forward 50! Need some defensive pressure in the forward line ASAP!

Yeah that is a bloody good idea. we have had a big problem with that and IMO you have found the answer.

Bring CJ back in greta game, great run and pressure.

Only negative is his kicking.

The_Dud · Post: # 569818Post **The_Dud** » Mon 19 May 2008 7:23pm

evertonfc wrote:
The_Dud wrote:u can't ignore a guy who gets best on in the 2's two weeks in a row
I reckon that Clinton Jones isn't good enough to play in the AFL is a huge issue for him to overcome.

same goes for Raph, but he's been given 30 odd games to show nothing....

evertonfc · Post: # 569832Post **evertonfc** » Mon 19 May 2008 7:46pm

The_Dud wrote:
evertonfc wrote:
The_Dud wrote:u can't ignore a guy who gets best on in the 2's two weeks in a row
I reckon that Clinton Jones isn't good enough to play in the AFL is a huge issue for him to overcome.
same goes for Raph, but he's been given 30 odd games to show nothing....

Good call.

Only thing is that Raph was still young, and we thought we could get him right. We couldn't.

Jones had a crack, looked like a rabbit in the headlights and was so woeful when he got the ball that it made any other asset in his game seem irrelevant.

mightysainters · Mon 19 May 2008 8:43pm

yes but he has tried to atone for his mistakes and i believe is up for it... just needs to adjust he can play and will be an AFL player in my opinion just gotta give him a crack... in the VFL last 2 weeks his kicking has been quite good and although it is his weakness he continues to impress so must be promoted... that dud raph non stop gets the benefit of the doubt and always gets it and now its clintons turn to be given a real crack... he actually tries as oposed to raph

evertonfc · Post: # 569885Post **evertonfc** » Mon 19 May 2008 8:46pm

mightysainters wrote:his kicking has been quite good and although it is his weakness he continues to impress so must be promoted

If we promote him ahead of Geary - who at least has some sort of future at AFL level - it shows we've got no idea.

Of course Jones can play at VFL level. Of course his skills are better at that level. Raph Clarke is the same - he just about stands out.

The problem? AFL = Intensity and pressure.

The skills of both players goes to water at AFL level. They aren't part of the future. We need to front up to this fact rather than trying to patch the burst water main with a piece of string.

Jones has had his chances, as has Raph. They're just not up to it, no matter how many BOGs they get in the twos.

mightysainters · Mon 19 May 2008 8:52pm

evertonfc wrote:
mightysainters wrote:his kicking has been quite good and although it is his weakness he continues to impress so must be promoted
If we promote him ahead of Geary - who at least has some sort of future at AFL level - it shows we've got no idea.

Of course Jones can play at VFL level. Of course his skills are better at that level. Raph Clarke is the same - he just about stands out.

The problem? AFL = Intensity and pressure.

The skills of both players goes to water at AFL level. They aren't part of the future. We need to front up to this fact rather than trying to patch the burst water main with a piece of string.

Jones has had his chances, as has Raph. They're just not up to it, no matter how many BOGs they get in the twos.

Are you serious? Raph? i have seen most casey games and he does NOT stand out... he is very average in VFL too... Intensity and pressure? this is exactly what Clinton has... to compare both chances they've had is ridiculous... Clinton has been a work horse to get where he is... Raph has done 1 pre season in 5 years... don't compare the two because its apples and oranges

maverick · Post: # 569906Post **maverick** » Mon 19 May 2008 8:58pm

evertonfc wrote:
mightysainters wrote:his kicking has been quite good and although it is his weakness he continues to impress so must be promoted
If we promote him ahead of Geary - who at least has some sort of future at AFL level - it shows we've got no idea.

Of course Jones can play at VFL level. Of course his skills are better at that level. Raph Clarke is the same - he just about stands out.

The problem? AFL = Intensity and pressure.

The skills of both players goes to water at AFL level. They aren't part of the future. We need to front up to this fact rather than trying to patch the burst water main with a piece of string.

Jones has had his chances, as has Raph. They're just not up to it, no matter how many BOGs they get in the twos.

Agree on CJ, but not on Raph.
I would like to see a real coach have a crack with Raph, he was always injured under GT, and Ross has no idea how to use him (or many others for that matter).

Really has he played any worse than Gram this year?

evertonfc · Post: # 569909Post **evertonfc** » Mon 19 May 2008 8:59pm

mightysainters wrote:don't compare the two because its apples and oranges

But...

mightysainters wrote:he actually tries as oposed to raph

Stupid is as stupid does.

mightysainters · Mon 19 May 2008 9:07pm

evertonfc wrote:
mightysainters wrote:don't compare the two because its apples and oranges
But...

mightysainters wrote:he actually tries as oposed to raph

Stupid is as stupid does.

ouch... but still you know what i meant... Jones puts his body on the line... has always.... and is a GUN player in VFL....

I'm saying to compare them as both awesome VFL players is silly because it certainly is not the case...